@student Yes, the contrapositive of z-some-y is y-some-z. Beyond that, I'm not sure what your question is, but if you'd clarify, I'd be happy to help.
MehranJuly 6, 2018
Hi @student, you are absolutely right, and thank you for pointing this error out to us. We are going to update and fix. Thank you again.
briannajordan90February 27, 2019
This is still wrong
RaviMarch 1, 2019
Hey there,
Thank you for pointing out this error. I have alerted our technical team.
For your reference, the Conclusion in the explanation should read
C: Z-some-Y Y-some-Z
Thank you.
rzamor87July 17, 2019
Quick question has the error been corrected on this question
cfrazierSeptember 18, 2019
No it hasn't been corrected
jnfogartystlOctober 8, 2019
Are two answers possible out of the given options? Seems that either Z->X or not Z->not X might be correct. If not, I'd appreciate a bit more explanation on why Z->X-some-Y does not yield the result of Z-some-Y in the same fashion as the answer provided. Thank you!
Isaac-JuarezOctober 17, 2019
To the person immediately before me:
Z->X is not the same as not Z->not X. But I also came to the same conclusion and selected Z->X. I don't understand how if all Zs are Xs, then if Z is sometimes Y cannot be logically concluded given that all Xs are sometimes Ys.
reicherjonNovember 14, 2019
Hi so what is the correct answer?
Enne-PhillipsJanuary 8, 2020
This problem still doesn't seem to be correct and for some reason I am not able to see a solution.
SamJune 19, 2024
Has this been corrected? I don't understand how D is not also correct. If all Z's are X's, and X is sometimes Y, then it logically follows that Z is sometimes Y. Do I have that wrong?
Emil-KunkinJune 21, 2024
It's possible that All Zs are X, but not all Xs are Z. It could be the case that the subset of Xs that are not Zs are the only Xs that are also Y.
JeanAugust 28 at 05:38AM
i am so confused? why is it not Y some Z? when do i know to put the "not?"
